Author Topic: Help revoke Bowling for Columbine's Oscar (Read 5883 times)

Hooligan · « **on:** April 28, 2003, 11:18:05 AM »

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85359,00.html

Hooligan

hawk220 · « **Reply #1 on:** April 28, 2003, 11:26:13 AM »

interesting to see if this works.

ra · « **Reply #2 on:** April 28, 2003, 11:57:32 AM »

It may work if the Oscar people give a damn about the integrity of their 'best documentary' award.

There was a book published a few years ago which claimed to be a thorough analsis of US gun ownership over the years. It concluded that guns were not widely owned by US citizens until after the civil war, when surplus guns became cheap. The author was awarded the Pulitzer prize. Later the prize was revoked when it was found that much of his supporting documentation did not exist.

ra

Pongo · « **Reply #3 on:** April 28, 2003, 12:12:06 PM »

Get the guy who runs the Baseball hall of fame to run the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and it will be done in 10 seconds.
Lots of other Oscars would be revoked as well Im sure.

ra · « **Reply #4 on:** April 28, 2003, 12:23:24 PM »

Quote

Lots of other Oscars would be revoked as well Im sure.

So you think 'Bowling for Columbine' meets the definition of a documentary?

midnight Target · « **Reply #5 on:** April 28, 2003, 12:23:58 PM »

I would be willing to bet that there are many Oscar winning documentaries that had questionable cuts and mislabeled quotes. Why "the Living Desert" by Disney was chock full of created scenes.

The NRA is just a much stronger lobby than the FBBL (Friends of the Blue Belly Lizard).

Pongo · « **Reply #6 on:** April 28, 2003, 12:24:01 PM »

ra · « **Reply #7 on:** April 28, 2003, 12:31:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Pongo
lol

Devastating reply.

funkedup · « **Reply #8 on:** April 28, 2003, 12:51:24 PM »

Thanks Hooligan, great website.
BTW MT I don't see any lobby involved here. Except maybe in getting the link posted on Fox News.

beet1e · « **Reply #9 on:** April 28, 2003, 01:02:04 PM »

ROFL! Never in the field of cinematography has so short a film made so many people upset for so long about so little.

ra · « **Reply #10 on:** April 28, 2003, 01:08:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by beet1e
ROFL! Never in the field of cinematography has so short a film made so many people upset for so long about so little.

T'aint the film, it's the 'Best Documentary' Oscar which sanctifies it that's bothering people.

beet1e · « **Reply #11 on:** April 28, 2003, 01:20:17 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by ra
T'aint the film, it's the 'Best Documentary' Oscar which sanctifies it that's bothering people.

I don't believe that. Why would gun fanatics give two hoots about the internal workings of the Academy Awards? That would be like drivers of Subaru WRX trying to disenfranchise Car and Driver as a magazine publisher because they published a test in which the WRX was beaten by the VW Golf R32.

Yeager · « **Reply #12 on:** April 28, 2003, 01:21:31 PM »

We are dealing with hollywood afterall.

I have definitely noticed a few things. Apqrt from never watching Martin Sheen to begin with, my love of both Tim Robbins and Suzan Sarandons work has been severely jeapordized. I wanted so bad to enjoy the latest Sci-Fi "Children of Dune" but found myself constantly drawn away from the fiction by the presence of Sarandon. As well, the Shawshank redemption, one of my all time favs, has lost its appeal to me.

Its all about politics.

ra · « **Reply #13 on:** April 28, 2003, 01:37:46 PM »

Quote

I don't believe that. Why would gun fanatics give two hoots about the internal workings of the Academy Awards? That would be like drivers of Subaru WRX trying to disenfranchise Car and Driver as a magazine publisher because they published a test in which the WRX was beaten by the VW Golf R32.

Because the Oscar folks are taking a blatant piece of political propaganda and declaring it not only a documentary, but 'best documentary'. Gun fanatics don't care about the Academy Awards except when it attacks the 2nd Amendment. There is no constitutional amendment regarding the right to own high performance cars.

ra

beet1e · « **Reply #14 on:** April 28, 2003, 01:49:34 PM »

"attacks the second amendment" ???

Please explain the nature of the attack. Sounds to me like the gun lobby is trying to attack the right to free speech. Or maybe it fancies itself as a self appointed body of film censors.

I saw a sign in an Indian restaurant once. It said "We have an agreement with our Bank. They don't sell food, and we don't cash cheques."

I suggest we let the Oscar awards be decided by those in the business of cinematography, and gun ownership rights to be championed by the NRA.